On 9/6/07, D.Terweij | NTG-Support <d.terweij at nettuning.net> wrote:
> From: "Karanbir Singh" <mail-lists at karan.org>
> > CentOS seems to be doing really well in the hosting business these days,
> > and even for people who would normally have used Windows or OSX on the
> > hosting previously, are now looking at using CentOS. And I thought it
> > would be nice to have a section on the wiki about exactly why that is.
>> For me that was the bad choice of the FC family. The biggest part, CentOS
> has a bigger life time then the crappy FC (6 months).
>> Danny.
The relationship between FC and Upstream is more complex than that.
It is not fair to call FC "crappy", because the projects have
different goals. The goal of an enterprise OS (Upstream, CentOS) is
long term support and a very stable system. The goal of something
like FC is to have more frequent updates, and provide more
cutting-edge packages, more aimed at desktop use. FC is actually a
testing ground for the Upstream Enterprise releases.
Make sure you take those things into account when you form your
opinions and understanding about a product.